The result was keep. While the article needs cleanup, the subject is notable. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC) reply
This looks like blatant advertising to me - and I can't see an obvious way to salvage it. However, I'm sparing it from {{ db-spam}} and bringing it over for discussion, as it looks like there is potentially a notable topic buried here - possibly more so for the architecture of the building than for the company itself. I'm not sure how anything longer than a one-paragraph stub could be extracted from the current article, though, and can't see an obvious way to expand on it. – iride scent 19:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC) reply
Also nominating:
The result was keep. While the article needs cleanup, the subject is notable. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC) reply
This looks like blatant advertising to me - and I can't see an obvious way to salvage it. However, I'm sparing it from {{ db-spam}} and bringing it over for discussion, as it looks like there is potentially a notable topic buried here - possibly more so for the architecture of the building than for the company itself. I'm not sure how anything longer than a one-paragraph stub could be extracted from the current article, though, and can't see an obvious way to expand on it. – iride scent 19:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC) reply
Also nominating: